Exploring techniques for encoding spoken instructions in working memory: a comparison of verbal rehearsal, motor imagery, self-enactment and action observation.
Saved in:
| Title: | Exploring techniques for encoding spoken instructions in working memory: a comparison of verbal rehearsal, motor imagery, self-enactment and action observation. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Yang, Tian-xiao (AUTHOR), Allen, Richard J. (AUTHOR), Waterman, Amanda H. (AUTHOR), Graham, Agnieszka J. (AUTHOR), Su, Xiao-min (AUTHOR), Gao, Yan (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Memory. Jan2024, Vol. 32 Issue 1, p41-54. 14p. |
| Subjects: | Experimental design, Statistics, Analysis of variance, Multivariate analysis, Task performance, Short-term memory, Research funding, Descriptive statistics, Repeated measures design, Data analysis, Speech, Motor ability |
| Geographic Terms: | China |
| Abstract: | Encoding and recalling spoken instructions is subject to working memory capacity limits. Previous research suggests action-based encoding facilitates instruction recall, but has not directly compared benefits across different types of action-based techniques. The current study addressed this in two experiments with young adults. In Experiment 1, participants listened to instructional sequences containing four action-object pairs, and encoded these instructions using either a motor imagery or verbal rehearsal technique, followed by recall via oral repetition or enactment. Memory for instructions was better when participants used a motor imagery technique during encoding, and when recalling the instructions by enactment. The advantage of using a motor imagery technique was present in both verbal and enacted recall. In Experiment 2, participants encoded spoken instructions whilst implementing one of four techniques (verbal rehearsal, motor imagery, observation of others' actions or self-enactment), and then recalled the instructions by oral repetition or enactment. For both verbal and enacted recall, memory for instructions was least accurate in the rehearsal condition, while the other encoding conditions did not differ from each other. These novel findings indicate similar benefits of imagining, observation and execution of actions in encoding spoken instructions, and enrich current understanding of action-based benefits in working memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Memory is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Encoding and recalling spoken instructions is subject to working memory capacity limits. Previous research suggests action-based encoding facilitates instruction recall, but has not directly compared benefits across different types of action-based techniques. The current study addressed this in two experiments with young adults. In Experiment 1, participants listened to instructional sequences containing four action-object pairs, and encoded these instructions using either a motor imagery or verbal rehearsal technique, followed by recall via oral repetition or enactment. Memory for instructions was better when participants used a motor imagery technique during encoding, and when recalling the instructions by enactment. The advantage of using a motor imagery technique was present in both verbal and enacted recall. In Experiment 2, participants encoded spoken instructions whilst implementing one of four techniques (verbal rehearsal, motor imagery, observation of others' actions or self-enactment), and then recalled the instructions by oral repetition or enactment. For both verbal and enacted recall, memory for instructions was least accurate in the rehearsal condition, while the other encoding conditions did not differ from each other. These novel findings indicate similar benefits of imagining, observation and execution of actions in encoding spoken instructions, and enrich current understanding of action-based benefits in working memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09658211 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/09658211.2023.2273763 |
